Local Bodies: First they ignore you

Written By: - Date published: 10:30 am, February 11th, 2014 - 13 comments
Categories: greens, Judith Collins, Metiria Turei, national, Politics, same old national - Tags:

Local bodies writes on the way that National has been concentrating their personal attacks at the Greens. It is a pretty typical display by National in any election year. But you get the impression they’re going to seriously be dumpster diving for dirt this year – especially Judith Collins. National are getting desperate at their disappearing coalition partners.

“First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win”
-Mahatma Gandhi

The 2014 election year looks as though it is developing into a campaign of personal attacks and rummaging though others’ dirty washing. I don’t mind being a member of a party that ‘goes hard’ on the issues but when we got a public analysis of the cost and aesthetic value of an MP’s clothing, and whether they have the right to wear it, a new low had been reached.

Many Green Party members are a little bemused and surprised at the amount of the attention the Green Party and its MPs are getting at this stage of the year. It almost appears that National and its supporters are more inclined to level their attacks on the Green Party than Labour.

While abuse and attacks are coming thick and fast it is easy to feel offended when the vast majority of the accusations are inaccurate, exaggerated, total beat ups or just plain lies. The immediate and most natural response is to be defensive and deny each and every accusation, but I suggest this will largely be a wasted effort. We are better to remember Gandhi’s quote and realize that we must be well along the continuum for getting into government.

It seems that rather than attending to the important issues of the day, National Party supporters are dredging Facebook for interesting tit bits of Green Party gossip and easily debunked list rankings are being analysed in detail. It is apparently more important to build up potential coalition partners and find dirt on the opposition than seriously attend to an unwelcome incursion of our territorial waters and address the fact that New Zealand products are being removed from Australian Supermarket shelves. In both cases the Government’s response appears to be less than decisive.

The National Party is counting heavily on the flag debate capturing more voter interest and attention than the mess they made of the asset sales and their rather rushed and expensive education initiative (only 44% in a Stuff poll think it’s a great plan).

The Green Party just needs to continue doing what it does best, putting forward practical solutions for a sustainable and compassionate future and asking the hard questions of a Government that has few answers. As National’s responses become more personal and desperate and the attacks become even more petty and vicious, we should not feel obliged to play the same game, we have far more productive ways to spend our time.

13 comments on “Local Bodies: First they ignore you ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Bill 1
    11 February 2014 at 11:22 am

    Why not just kill the flag debate dead by pointing out that should Scotland vote for independence then the Union Jack may be up for a make over ie, no point in having a debate when there’s a possibility that some design options will be beyond your control?

  2. Te Reo Putake 2
    11 February 2014 at 12:26 pm

    I see there’s an attack post over on Kiwiblog having a crack at the Greens’ candidate self assessment form. The form seems to have have been harvested from a potential candidate’s fb page.*

    The comments are pretty revealing, not least because most of the commenters seem unable to read the form accurately and secondly because one of the commenters is convicted child abuser David Garrett, who would (hopefully) have failed his application to be an ACT MP if he had told the truth about his personal corruption.

    *A lovely bloke btw. Someone who really does embody everything that the GP stand for personally and publicly and, even more importantly, a footballer of considerable class and swashbuckling style.

    • Lanthanide 2.1
      11 February 2014 at 12:49 pm

      When was David Garret convicted of child abuse? Citation please.

      • Te Reo Putake 2.1.1
        11 February 2014 at 1:13 pm

        Garrett was actually discharged without conviction in 2005 and censured, suspended from practicing law and ordered to pay costs by the Law Society for covering up the matter. The abuse took place in 1984.

        • Lanthanide 2.1.1.1
          11 February 2014 at 2:22 pm

          So he’s not a convicted child abuser.

          Helen Clark was sued for defamation for calling that guy a murderer when really he was only convicted of manslaughter.

          Also I believe David Garret stole a dead babies identity, which probably doesn’t count as “child abuse” and I doubt would have been charged as such.

          • Te Reo Putake 2.1.1.1.1
            11 February 2014 at 2:40 pm

            Quite right, Lanth, and Garrett will no doubt be grateful for your support. From now on I’ll refer to it as recreational necrophilia. Because fucking with a kid after they’re dead ‘probably doesn’t count as child abuse’ in your world.

            • Lanthanide 2.1.1.1.1.1
              12 February 2014 at 9:22 am

              To put it blunty, a child that is dead cannot be a party to child abuse after the fact.

              Also, stealing someone’s name, anyone’s name, doesn’t count as “abuse”. Identity theft is the crime you’re looking for.

              That fact that he’s a repugnant ass-wipe doesn’t change the nature of the crime he committed, much as you wish it would.

  3. BM 3
    11 February 2014 at 12:37 pm

    By attacking the greens and pointing out their loopyness, you’re sowing seeds of doubt in the mind of the soft Labour voter.

  4. tricledrown 4
    11 February 2014 at 12:53 pm

    Big Mouth labour don’t have any soft voters left according to your Own commentries.
    Barking up the wrong tree.
    Barking Mad.
    That attack on Materia backfired big time ms turei got a whole lot of free publicity everyone in NZ got to look around her $137,000 castle priceless.
    Collins and Tolley were made to look like Barking Mad attack dogs.
    That worked out well.
    As I said earlier give you lot earlier give em Enough rope andthey will hang themselves.
    Cup of tea anyone!

  5. blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 5
    11 February 2014 at 2:29 pm

    “Many Green Party members are a little bemused and surprised at the amount of the attention the Green Party and its MPs are getting at this stage of the year.”

    Why be surprised?

    From watching Parliament channel my observation is that the Greens have gone from being scoffed at and dismissed with a snigger to having to be taken very seriously due to their discipline and persistent clear and research based arguments.

    They also communicate well with the public making it clear what the ramifications of National’s policies are and why they are objecting.

    Good on you the Greens – I suggest wearing the snotty-nosed attacks as a badge of honour – you have pissed them off because you regularly offer a better alternative to the there-is-no-alternative-to-selling-out that National are blindly and blithely following.

  6. aerobubble 6
    11 February 2014 at 5:25 pm

    Key went to AUS, and came back with,
    i.) nothing to stop supermarkets in OZ cutting out NZ produce,
    ii.) an invite to G20? which was likely anyway,
    iii.) relief for aussie born kiwi students,

    Now Key has been in power for five years, and now he cares about kiwis in OZ.
    Kiwi taxes to the Australian exchequer which pays for Aussies to get the benefit,
    to get student loans, etc. Its taken Key five years to start rectifying the Clark
    government mistake (which it was not since Key agreed, the Australian do what they
    want). But what was Key’s reasoning? That Cunliffe was responsible as he was
    a minister in Clarks govt at the time. Well that would suggest that Key’s ministers
    are responsible for foreign government policies mess ups that harm kiwis.

    Its a twisted sordid game politics. Or just Key has nothing better than distraction.

    Dunne, now internal affairs minister, responsible in part in keeping state secrets
    from getting out. Tells us he has no responsibility for the Kitteridge report.
    I wonder if a staff member who was fired were to turn around and say the
    same to him in his new position as minister? That the Kitteridge report, appendixes,
    and all, were not his responsibility because he no longer worked for the government.

    It just wouldn’t wash. Dunne has no credibility, as Winston Peter rightly hit home
    how could an alleged leaker of classified material be suitable for the role of a
    minister who looks after the security of govt as Internal Affairs minister.
    Or is the ministry just a very high paying bauble with no actual functions, a rort,
    a gift, so to speak. Pork.